## Contents

| Section | Page | |------------------------------------------------------------------------|------| | Contents | 2 | | Introduction | 3 | | Key Findings | 5 | | 1: Civil cases | 7 | | 2: Judicial Reviews at the Administrative Court | 14 | | 3: The Royal Courts of Justice | 21 | | 4: Offices of the Supreme Court | 27 | | 5: Magistrates (Justices of the Peace) | 28 | | 6: Assessment of litigation costs, and publicly funded legal services | 30 | | Annex A: Planned upcoming changes to publication | 31 | | Annex B: List of Accompanying Tables and CSV | 32 | | Annex C: Timeline of changes to civil procedures | 35 | | Annex C: Explanatory notes | 36 | | Further information | 37 | | Contacts | 38 | Introduction

This statistical bulletin presents statistics on three key areas of civil and administrative justice:

- County court civil (non-family) cases that took place in England and Wales in January to March 2016;
- Judicial review cases processed by the administrative court in England and Wales up to March 2016;
- The Royal Courts of Justice cases processed by the high court, court of appeal, supreme court and the judicial committee of the privy council, up to December 2015;

The figures give an overview of the volume of cases dealt with by these courts over time and are used to monitor court workloads, assist in the development of policy and their subsequent monitoring and evaluation.

Civil cases are those that do not involve family matters or failure to pay council tax. These cases are mainly dealt with by county courts and typically relate to debt, the repossession of property, personal injury, the return of goods and insolvency. Particularly important, complex or substantial cases are instead dealt with in the High Court.

Judicial reviews (JRs) are a process by which individuals, businesses and other affected parties can challenge the lawfulness of decisions or actions of the executive, including those of ministers, local authorities, other public bodies and those exercising public functions. It is a largely judge-developed procedure and can be characterised as the rule of law in action, providing a key mechanism for individuals to hold the executive to account. It is, however, intended to operate quickly and proportionately. Certain protections are in principle provided against spurious claims: only those with sufficient interest are able to bring a case and they must first obtain permission for their case to be heard.

The Royal Courts of Justice chapter is published annually and covers figures up to 2015. It provides summary figures on the number cases in each of the appellate courts, as well as the high court and information on the judicial appointments and workload. It also provides information on the number of days sat by judges across all courts and court cost bills. We will be reviewing the coverage and relevance of the statistics over the coming year.

At the time of publishing due to data quality concerns, the judges sitting days statistics (judiciary chapter) for 2015 were not available, these are expected to be published alongside the April to June 2016 publication.

Every six months the Civil Justice Statistics Quarterly also includes a chapter on privacy injunctions. This will be available next in Civil Justice Statistics Quarterly April to June 2016, due to be published on 1 September 2016. Information about the systems and data included in this publication can be found in ‘A Guide to Civil Court and Administrative Justice Statistics’ which is published alongside this report. www.gov.uk/government/statistics/guide-to-civil-and-administrative-justice-statistics

There is also a separate glossary published alongside this which provides brief definitions for the terms used in this report. Information regarding the symbols and conventions used in the bulletin are given in the explanatory notes section.

Previous editions of Civil Justice Statistics Quarterly can be found here: www.gov.uk/government/collections/civil-justice-statistics-quarterly

The next publication of Civil Justice Statistics Quarterly is scheduled to be published on 1 September 2016, covering the period April to June 2016.

Users of the statistics

The main users of these statistics are ministers and officials in central government responsible for developing policy with regards to civil and administrative justice. Other users include lawyers and academics, other central government departments such as the Department for Communities and Local Government, and non-governmental bodies, including various voluntary organisations with an interest in civil and administrative justice. Key Findings

This report presents statistics on three areas of justice: civil (excluding family cases), judicial reviews in England and Wales up to March 2016 and the Royal Courts of Justice in 2015.

Civil cases

- In January to March 2016, courts dealt with around 437,000 claims, up 10% on the same quarter in the previous year, driven entirely by an increase in specified money claims (up 16% over the same period).

- There were also around 39,000 allocations and 71,000 defences - defences were up 9% and allocations remained level with January to March 2015.

- Judgments fell between 2009 and 2012, but have since seen year on year increases with revised figures for 2015 showing an increase of 4% compared to the previous year. In January to March 2016, there were around 254,000 judgments, a 4% increase on the same quarter in 2015.

- In January to March 2016, both the claimant and defendant had legal representation in 56% of all defences, similar to the same quarter last year. Neither the defendant nor the claimant had representation in 17% of defences (compared to 19% in the same quarter last year). Both claimant and defendant are more likely to have legal representation for unspecified money claims, where 97% of all claim defences have both parties represented.

- There was an average of 51.9 weeks between a fast or multi-track claim being issued and the claim going to trial in January to March 2016, nearly three weeks quicker than the same period in the previous year. Small claims came to trial on average 32.2 weeks for trials in January to March 2016, a small decrease of 0.2 weeks on the same period in 2015.

Judicial reviews at the Administrative Court

- During the first quarter of 2016 there were around 1,180 applications lodged in the administrative court, a 12% increase on the same period of 2015.

- 82% of the applications lodged in 2015 have now closed. A lower proportion of cases became eligible for a final hearing -16% compared with 20% of cases in 2014. Of the 734 cases in 2015 that were eligible for a final hearing, to date 198 have reached a decision. Of these, 88 (2% of all cases lodged in 2015) were found in favour of the appellant.

- From 1 October 2012 to 31 March 2016, around 29,000 cases were lodged and around 18,000 (62%) had reached permission or oral renewal stage. Of those that had reached these stages, 26% were found to be totally without merit. • In 2015 there were 1,700 (36%) cases lodged against the Ministry of Justice. Of those lodged against the MoJ, 7% were granted permission to proceed to the final hearing stage, and 2% were found in favour of the appellant at final hearing.

The Royal Courts of Justice

• In 2015, the overall caseload of the Royal Courts of Justice was around 18,000 cases, with the majority of these cases (58%) related to the High Court, followed by the Court of Appeal (42%). The Supreme Court accounted for 96 cases.

• The overall caseload had decreased 40% from 30,000 in 2013 to around 18,000 in 2014. This decline was due to a change implemented(^1) in November 2013, in which the Upper Tribunal for Immigration and Asylum Chamber (UTIAC) took over responsibility, from the High Court, for the majority of Civil Immigration and Asylum Judicial Review cases.

Assessment of litigation costs, and publicly funded legal services

• In 2015, 16,000 cost bills were assessed in the senior costs office, 5% higher than the number assessed in 2014, 46% of which were receivers’ costs in the court of protection and 33% civil legal aid assessments.

(^1) [www.justice.gov.uk/courts/rcj-rolls-building/administrative-court/applying-for-judicial-review](http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/rcj-rolls-building/administrative-court/applying-for-judicial-review) 1: Civil cases

A civil claim against a person or a company (the defendant) starts when a person or company (the claimant) completes and submits a claim form to the county court. This can be done either in person or online (for money and possession claims only). A copy of the claim form along with a response pack is sent to (served on) the defendant who has 14 days to respond to the claim. For money claims, if the defendant disputes (defends) the claim (in full or part) and mediation fails, the case is allocated by a judge to one of three case-management tracks (small claims track (for claims with a value less that £10K), fast track or multi track). Allocated cases which are not settled or withdrawn generally result in a small claim hearing or trial. A judgment regarding the claim can be made at various stages of the process. There are various methods of enforcing a judgment through the county courts including warrants and charging orders.

As supplementary information, we also provide the percentage of claims issued in a quarter or year that have already resulted in a defence, allocation or hearing or trial. Caution should be exercised when interpreting these figures for recent years. The information contained in the bulletin is based on the available data when the database was extracted; consequently a proportion of claims made in more recent quarters are still awaiting progression to the next stage of court action. Claims from earlier periods will have had longer for the case to be processed than those from more recent periods so a lower proportion of these earlier claims are likely to be still awaiting a defence, allocation or hearing or trial.

Number of claims issued

In January to March 2016, a total of 437,430 claims were issued, the highest quarterly total since 2009, and a 10% increase on the same quarter last year (See table 1.1 and figure 1.1). Annually, there had been a general downward trend in the total number of claims issued between 2006 and 2012 from 2.1 million to a low of 1.4 million – since then, the trend has reversed, showing increases in 2013 and 2014. Revised figures for 2015 show this trend has once again reversed, with a slight decrease of 2% compared to 2014.

In January to March 2016, 83% of all claims were money claims, an increase of three percentage points on the same quarter in 2015. Of these money claims, 90% (325,678) related to claims for specified amounts of money (two percentage points higher than the same quarter last year). The sharp increase in the number of specified money claims (up 16% from the same quarter last year) has driven the increase seen in total claims this quarter. Contributing factors relating to this increase can be attributed to a seasonal peak in tax claims filed by HMRC in January to March 2016, and there was also an increase in the number of bulk cases being filed where previously paper cases had been processed – this allowed more claims to be filed in one go. The remaining 10% of money claims related to unspecified money claims, down two percentage points from the same quarter last year (Table 1.2). Of these claims, those relating to personal injury were down 3% on the first quarter of 2015, and those relating to other unspecified money were down 20%.

Unspecified money claims include personal injury, which make up the overwhelming majority of these claims. During January to March 2016, 95% of unspecified money claims were for personal injury, compared to 94% in the same quarter in 2015. This trend has been consistent since the second quarter of 2012, when the County Court Money Claims Centre (CCMCC) took over the processing of the money claims and more accurately recorded personal injury claims. (Table 1.2).

In January to March 2016, there were 74,549 non-money claims (down 5% on the same quarter in 2015). Annually, this figure dropped from an average of just under 400,000 between 2000 and 2008 to an average of just under 329,000 between 2009 and 2014. In 2015 the number of non-money claims fell further to 299,104. This decrease can be partially explained by the fall in mortgage possession claims; there were 5,072 fewer claims in January to March 2016 compared with the same quarter in 2015, an 11% decrease. This coincided with lower interest rates, a proactive approach from mortgage lenders in managing consumers in financial difficulties, and various interventions, such as introduction of the Mortgage Pre-Action Protocol(^2) that encouraged more pre-action contact between lender and borrower (Table 1.2).

There were 4,464 insolvency petitions(^3) (excluding in the Royal Courts of Justice) in January to March 2016. This shows a 20% decrease on the same quarter last year and remains in line with the general downward trend seen since 2009 (Table 1.2). The decrease since 2009 has been driven by falls in bankruptcy petitions made by debtors and bankruptcy petitions made by creditors, whilst petitions for company windings up(^4) have remained stable.

(^2) For more information on mortgage and landlord possession statistics trends and the Mortgage Pre-Action Protocol please see Annex B of the Mortgage and landlord possession statistics publication.

(^3) Insolvency petitions relate to bankruptcy or companies “winding up”

(^4) See the accompanying csv files for more information In January to March 2016, there were 71,284 defences made, 9% more than during the same quarter in 2015. Looking at the longer term, there has been a general downward annual trend since the peak of just under 340,000 in 2007, with the 2014 figure being 264,701. Since 2014, the annual number of defences has remained stable, with 264,616 defences in 2015.

For money claims, if the claim is defended, further information is usually provided by each of the parties, after which the case is allocated by a judge to one of three case-management tracks. In January to March 2016, a total of 38,774 allocations were made, no change from the same period last year (Table 1.3).

- In January to March 2016, just under half of all allocations (17,511, or 45%) were to the small claims track, three percentage points less than in the same quarter of 2015. This track is generally for cases with a claim value of up to £10,000(^5) which require less preparation by the parties involved than the more complex cases allocated to the fast or multi track. The trials are designed to be accessible to people

______________________________________________________________________

(^5) On 1 April 2013 due to a policy change, the maximum claim value for cases allocated to the small claims track increased from £5,000 to £10,000. who do not have representation by a solicitor or counsel, and are dealt with in about an hour.

- During January to March 2016, 45% (17,452) of claims were allocated to the fast track, an increase of four percentage points from the same quarter in 2015. This track is generally for cases with a claim value of between £10,000 and not more than £25,000, with issues not complex enough to merit more than a one day trial.

- 3,811 claims (10%) were allocated to the multi-track, compared with 12% allocated to the multi-track on the same quarter of 2015. This track is generally for cases with a claim value exceeding £25,000 with more complex issues. They generally last more than one day at trial.

In January to March 2016, a total of 253,532 judgments were made, up 4% on the same period last year. Annually, the number of judgments fell between 2009 and 2012, but this has since begun to show an increase. In 2015, there were 867,665 judgments made, an increase of 4% compared to 2014 (Table 1.4).

Defended cases which are not settled or withdrawn generally result in a trial (Table 1.5). In total, there were 13,123 trials (of all types) in January to March 2016, up 8% on the same quarter in 2015.

In January to March 2016, 9,169 small claims trials took place, up four percent on the same quarter in 2015. On average, these trials occurred 32.0 weeks after the claim was originally made. This is slightly less than the average time taken in January to March 2015 (32.2 weeks).

Looking over the longer term, the average annual time taken to reach small claims trial steadily increased over time to a peak of 32.8 in 2014. This has dropped slightly to 32.4 weeks in 2015. Fast and multi-track trials (of which there were 3,954 in January to March 2016, an increase of 17% on January to March 2015) occurred on average 51.9 weeks after the claim was originally made. The time between issue and the claim going to trial rose between 2008 and 2013 but has fallen in 2014 and 2015, to an annual average of 54.4 weeks (Table 1.5).

**Enforcement**

There are various methods of enforcing a judgment through the county courts. The most common method of enforcing a monetary judgment is the warrant of execution against a debtor’s goods. This is where, unless the amount owed is paid, items owned by the debtor can be recovered by a bailiff acting on behalf of the court and sold.

The number of warrants issued has followed a generally decreasing trend since 2000, until mid-2014 to mid-2015 when numbers increased. Since Q3 2015, the number of warrants issued per quarter has remained relatively stable. During January to March 2016, there were 58,488 warrants issued, representing a 3% decrease on the same quarter last year (Table 1.4). Alternatively, various types of court orders can be obtained:

- attachment of earnings orders enable payment through the debtor’s employer.
- third party debt orders enable payment by freezing and then seizing money owed by a third party to the debtor.
- Charging orders obtain security for the payment against the debtor’s assets. This may be followed by an order for sale which forces the sale of these assets.

In January to March 2016, 24,749 enforcement orders were made, a decrease of 21% compared to the same period last year. This figure has been generally falling since 2008.

**Legal representation**

Figures on the legal representation of parties in civil (non family) related court cases are shown in Table 1.6. This gives the number of claims defended during each quarter, for mortgage and landlord possession, other non-money claims, specified money claims and unspecified money claims, according to whether the applicant(s), respondent(s), both, or neither had legal representation during the case.

Figure 1.2 shows the number of defences broken down by representation status in England and Wales.

**Figure 1.2: Proportion of civil defences and legal representation status, 2013 – January to March 2016**

In 2015, both the claimant and defendant had legal representation in 58% of defences (compared to 54% in 2014) whilst neither the respondent nor the claimant had representation in 18% of defences (compared with 20% in Defences with either the claimant or defendant only represented were 20% and 4% of all defences respectively, compared to 22% and 4% respectively in 2014.

During January to March 2016, a small drop of 3 percentage points against the previous quarter can be seen in the proportion of cases where both the claimant and defendant were represented, conversely the proportion of cases with only claimant being represented has increased by 3 percentage points over the same period. One factor leading to this change is likely to be the increase in the number of specified money as they are less likely to have representation on both sides.

In the most recent quarter (January to March 2016), both parties were legally represented in 56% of defended cases, down one percentage point on the equivalent quarter in 2015. Neither the defendant nor the claimant had representation in 17% of defences (compared to 19% in the same quarter last year).

In almost all unspecified money claim defences (97%) both the respondent and claimant had legal representation. For the other types of defences, legal representation status was more evenly distributed, although mortgage and landlord possession defences were more likely to have no legal representation for either the respondent or the claimant.

Changes to legal aid came into effect as of April 2013, and removed legal aid eligibility for some civil cases. Figures show that the proportion of defences with legal representation for both parties fell during 2013 until mid-2014, but has increased steadily since then and into 2015 with levels of legal representation almost back at the levels seen prior to the legal aid eligibility changes.

The Legal Aid Agency (LAA - formerly the Legal Services Commission) collects statistics on those applying for legal aid, and figures on the number of applications received and certificates granted by various civil categories. These are published in their quarterly statistical report which can be found here:

www.gov.uk/government/collections/legal-aid-statistics

Civil proceedings in the Magistrates’ Courts

Magistrates’ courts deal with criminal and some civil cases, and cases are dealt with either by justices of the peace, who are unqualified and who are paid only expenses, or by District Judges who receive some payment. Magistrates can deal with a limited number of civil cases such as arrears of income tax, national insurance contributions, council tax or payments of child maintenance.

There were 15,911 completed civil proceedings in the Magistrates’ Court in January to March 2016, a 4% increase on the same period last year (Table 1.2). It should be noted that a proceeding can either relate to a single case or multiple cases, so the numbers of cases completed is greater than the number of completed proceedings. 2: Judicial Reviews at the Administrative Court

Judicial reviews (JRs) are a process by which individuals, businesses and other affected parties can challenge the lawfulness of decisions or actions of the Executive, including those of ministers, local authorities, other public bodies and those exercising public functions. It is a largely judge-developed procedure and can be characterised as the rule of law in action, providing a key mechanism for individuals to hold the Executive to account.

This chapter tracks the progress of JRs lodged at the Administrative Court between 1 January 2000 and 31 March 2016. The figures presented in this chapter exclude Judicial Reviews that are dealt with by the Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber (UTIAC), unless otherwise stated; however they are publicly available in a separate publication6.

As the information included in this chapter has been extracted from a live database, all figures are refreshed each quarter and therefore there are minor revisions between the information presented here and in previous publications.

Information for all years is provided in the supporting tables and CSV that accompany this publication. Please note for later years, cases may not have progressed to the end of the process, so the progression and timeliness figures for these cases should be treated with caution, in particular for applications lodged during the year 2015 and also 2016 to date, where a larger proportion of cases will not have been concluded.

For more information on the Judicial Review process, including how topics are allocated to Immigration/Asylum and Other, please see the A Guide to Civil and Administrative Justice Statistics7.

Applications for permission to apply for Judicial Review

During the first quarter of 2016, there were 1,176 applications for judicial review. This number is in line with the overall trend seen in 2015, in which applications lodged totalled 4,679. The overall annual trend in judicial review applications received had been steadily increasing, with the exception of a dip in 2004. In 2000, there were 4,238 applications for permission to apply for a JR and by 2013, this had risen to an annual intake of 15,594 (over a threefold increase) (Table 2.1).

JR Civil (Immigration and Asylum) cases had been driving this increase, up from 2,151 in 2000 to 13,129 in 2013. This type of judicial review accounted for half of all JRs in 2000 and 84% of all JRs in 2013 - this proportion fell to just under half (47%) in 2014. The sharp decrease seen in 2014 was due to

6 Tribunal and Gender Recognition Certificate Statistics Quarterly: www.gov.uk/government/collections/tribunals-statistics

7www.gov.uk/government/statistics/guide-to-civil-and-administrative-justice-statistics a change implemented(^8) in November 2013, in which the Upper Tribunal for Immigration and Asylum Chamber (UTIAC) took over responsibility for the majority of Civil Immigration and Asylum Judicial Review cases. The reduction in Immigration and Asylum JR cases has resulted in a subsequent increase in Immigration and Asylum tribunal cases. In 2015, there were 15,179 JR receipts at the UTIAC, giving a total number of JRs across the Administrative Court and UTIAC of around 20,000. More detailed figures on the number of JRs taking place in the UTIAC are published in the Tribunal and Gender Recognition Statistics Quarterly Publication.

In January to March 2016, 59% of all JRs were Civil Immigration and Asylum cases and only 3 cases have been subsequently transferred to the UTIAC.

**Figure 2.1: Annual Judicial Review Applications, by type(^9) calendar year 2000-2015**

JR civil (other) cases steadily rose from 1,727 in 2000 to 2,192 in 2013. In 2014 the figure fell to 1,904 a 13% decrease on the previous year. JR criminal cases remained fairly stable from 2000 to 2011, fluctuating between 280-370 cases each year. In 2012 it reached a peak of 384 cases and has since fallen to 273 in 2013 and an all time low of 262 cases in 2015. In January to March 2016, there have been 61 new cases for JR criminal and 417 for JR (civil) other.

______________________________________________________________________

(^8) [www.justice.gov.uk/courts/rcj-rolls-building/administrative-court/applying-for-judicial-review](http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/rcj-rolls-building/administrative-court/applying-for-judicial-review)

(^9) This chart excludes a small number of cases that could not be allocated to a type. Case progression (Table 2.2)

Once a judicial review has been lodged, it then progresses through the process until it is concluded; the time this process will take will be different for each case(^\\text{10}).

The three main stages of the Judicial Review process once a case has been lodged are:

- **Permission stage** - where the Court’s permission is required for a claim for JR to proceed. This can be in the form of an oral or paper hearing.

- **Oral renewal stage** - In cases where the Court refuses permission to proceed on the papers (either in full or in part); this is where the claimant requests that the decision be reconsidered at a hearing.

- **Final hearing** – Where permission is granted for a case to proceed at either the permission or oral renewal stage, this is the point where cases are heard and a judgment is made.

Please note, case progression figures can be affected by the case mix, which has changed over time and thus any previously observed trends should be viewed with caution. As an example different case types can have different mean lengths of timeliness. Civil judicial reviews for immigration and asylum rose from 51% of all cases in 2000 to 84% of all cases in 2013, 47% in 2014 and 57% in 2015 - this type of case takes longer to complete, therefore overall mean timeliness will increase the greater proportion of these cases within the case mix.

Also, the case progression figures will change each quarter as time allows for more cases to progress through the system.

**Permission stage**

- In 2000, 85% of judicial reviews lodged reached the permission stage and 29% were granted permission to proceed. These proportions have decreased gradually over time to an all-time low in 2013 of 54% JRs reaching permission stage and 9% being granted permission to proceed. Since the transfer of IA cases to the UTIAC the proportion reaching the permission stage has increased to 78% in 2014 and 77% in 2015. Those granted permission to proceed were 16% and 13% of cases lodged in 2014 and 2015 respectively.

- In January to March 2016, the proportion reaching the permission stage stood at 35%, with 4% to date being granted permission to proceed to date.

(^{10}) For more information see the following guide: [www.gov.uk/government/statistics/guide-to-civil-and-administrative-justice-statistics](http://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/guide-to-civil-and-administrative-justice-statistics) Oral renewals

- In 2000, 18% of all cases lodged were granted an oral renewal. This rose to 26% in 2001 and steadily fell to 14% in 2009. There was a slight increase to 17% in 2012, before falling to 12% in 2014 and decreasing to 9% in 2015. A fee to renew the claim for an oral renewal (where previously there was no fee) was introduced in April 2014 which may have reduced the numbers. There are also a number of JRs that are not eligible for renewal if refused, or have permission granted – challenging decisions of the Upper Tribunal. These claims end in this court if refused or are remitted back to the Upper Tribunal if permission granted.

- In terms of those granted an oral renewal in 2000, 4% of all cases lodged received an oral renewal and were granted permission to proceed. This proportion has remained essentially stable ever since, with a peak of 6% in 2001 and has been at 3% every year from 2008 to 2015, with the exception of 2013 (when the proportion was 2%). In January to March 2016, only 10 cases to date have reached the oral renewal stage, of which one has been granted permission to proceed.

Final hearing

- The proportion of cases eligible for a final hearing (granted permission to proceed at permission stage or oral renewal) has steadily reduced over time, from 33% in 2000 to 10% in 2013. The rate then increased to 20% in 2014, dropping back down to 16% during 2015. To date 4% of cases have been eligible for final hearing during January to March 2016.

- The proportion of all cases lodged found in favour of the claimant at a final hearing has reduced from 12% in 2000 to a low of 1% in 2013, rising to 4% in 2014, and decreasing again to 2% in 2015. In January to March 2016, only two cases to date have reached the final hearing phase, and one of these was found in favour of the claimant.

Timeliness (figure 2.2 and table 2.3)

Timeliness figures are based on the date the judicial review is lodged to the date of various stages of the process. It is not a measure of the time the Administrative Court takes to deal with a judicial review as it also includes time taken for parties to the JR to provide evidence and any adjournments or postponements requested. Caution must be taken when interpreting the most recent data, particularly that for 2014 and 2015, as not enough time has passed for all cases to reach each stage and those that have will be cases that are shorter in length - the average will therefore be lower than the true figure (96% of cases lodged in 2014 are classed as ‘Closed’, compared with 82% of cases lodged in 2015, and only 29% of those lodged so far in January to March 2016).

The mean time taken from lodging a case to the permission stage decision has remained relatively stable between 2006 and 2013 where the number was 118 and 125 days respectively (reaching a low of 89 in 2008 and 2010); prior to this, the number was stable at approximately 65 days (from 2000-2005). For those cases lodged in 2015 classed as closed (82% of cases lodged), the figure is significantly lower at 62 days. This may be driven by the reduced caseload, due to most of the Immigration and Asylum cases moving to the UTIAC.

The mean time taken from lodging a case to the oral renewal stage decision has fluctuated over the years. From 2000-2004, the average time was 130 days. This increased rapidly to 209 days in 2005 and to a peak of 267 days in 2007. The figure then fell sharply to 180 days in 2008 before rising to an average of 228 days from 2009 to 2013. For those cases lodged in 2015 classed as closed (82% of cases lodged), the number has fallen to 127 days.

The mean time taken from lodging a case to the final hearing decision showed a similar pattern; 205 days in 2000 peaking to 425 days in 2006 and fluctuating since then. The 2013 figure stood at 368, while the 2014 figure fell considerably to 245 days, though this is subject to change as unclosed cases progress through the system, (96% of cases in 2014 are so far closed). For the 82% of cases lodged in 2015 classed as closed, the mean timeliness has fallen to 183 days.

**Figure 2.2: Average time taken for each stage of the Judicial Review process, 2000 to 2015**

The average time taken to reach each stage is calculated using only those cases that have reached the stage in question. Figures for later years will change in future publications as cases progress through the system, especially for cases lodged in 2015.

Please note that the timeliness analysis includes cases that were transferred to the Upper Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber. These cases were effectively closed on the COINS database in November 2013. Totally without merit (Table 2.4)

In refusing permission for judicial review, a judge can certify a case to be totally without merit (TWM). As part of the Government's reforms to judicial review procedures, for cases issued on or after 1st July 2013, a case refused permission and certified as totally without merit cannot be renewed at the oral renewal hearing stage. A claimant can however appeal against this decision, which would be dealt with at the Appeals Court (in criminal JRs, there is no appeal route from a refusal of permission if TWM). The outcomes of such cases are not recorded in these figures.

From 1 October 2012 to 31 March 2016, there were 28,725 cases lodged. Of these, 17,765 (62%) had reached permission or oral renewal stage at the time the data was extracted in January 2016. Of those that had reached these stages, 4,574 (26%) were found to be totally without merit.

Judicial reviews by defendant

This section explores the progress of JRIs lodged at the Administrative Court by the defendant type (individual government department or public body). The defendant type information is derived from the free text field ‘defendant name’ in the Administrative Court COINS database System, which is then grouped by type of defendant. The defendant specified by the claimant on the claim form is inputted into the database; however as this is a manually typed field it is open to inputting errors and therefore the figures in this section should be used with caution. For more information see annex C.

This section is published annually and covers the period from 2007 to 2015.

In 2015, the Ministry of Justice was the department/public body with the largest number of JRIs applications lodged against them, with 1,702 JR applications lodged against them, 36% of all applications lodged in that year. This was 15% more than the previous year (1,480 in 2014). Of those lodged against the MoJ, 118 applications (7% of total applications lodged against the MoJ) were granted permission to proceed to the final hearing stage, and of those 26 were found in favour of the appellant at final hearing (2% of the total applications lodged).

The second largest defendant department in 2015 was the Home Office, with 1,551 cases (33% of all applications lodged in 2015), a 32% increase on 2014 (where 1,176 cases were lodged). The large reduction seen between 2013 and 2014 is due to the Upper Tribunal for Immigration and Asylum Chamber (UTIAC) taking over responsibility, from November 2013, for the majority of Civil Immigration and Asylum Judicial Review cases. Therefore the reduction in Home Office cases seen in the Administrative Court figures reported here is because the cases have moved to a different part of the justice system, rather than being an actual decline in the number of applications lodged. More detailed figures on the number of JRIs taking place in the UTIAC are published in the Tribunal and Gender Recognition Statistics Quarterly Publication.

Local authorities had 795 applications lodged against them in 2015 (up 7% on 2014) and of which, 190 (24%) were given permission to proceed to final hearing and 25 (3% of all applications lodged against LAs) were found in favour of the claimant at final hearing.

The number of applications lodged against the remaining defendant types is relatively low, with the Police as the fourth largest at 88 claims against them in 2015, followed by HM Customs & Revenue with only 76 applications lodged.

For the MoJ the figures are broken down further, into different areas of the department. This has shown that tribunals had the largest proportion of applications lodged against them, with 72% (1,217) of MoJ JRs in 2015 being against a tribunal. This was 378 (45%) more tribunal applications when compared to 2014. 3: The Royal Courts of Justice

There are various appeal courts that are administered by HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS):

- The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council - the final Court of Appeal for 23 Commonwealth territories and four independent Republics within the Commonwealth.

- The Supreme Court - the Supreme Court of Appeal in the United Kingdom, replacing the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords in October 2009.

- The Court of Appeal - divided into the Criminal Division, which hears appeals from the Crown Court and Courts Martial, and the Civil Division, which hears appeals mainly against decisions in the High Court and county courts.

- The High Court - has three Divisions, Chancery Division, Queen’s Bench Division and Family Division, each of which handles different types of civil work.

For more information on the roles of these specialised courts please see the A Guide to Civil and Administrative Justice Statistics that was published alongside this publication. Please note the High Court also covers the Judicial Reviews which are explored in more detail in Chapter 2.

In 2015, the overall caseload of the Royal Courts of Justice was 18,051 cases; this is a slight decrease of 1% on the caseload in 2014 (18,311) which had fallen by 40% on the caseload in 2013 (30,069). The majority of these cases (58%) related to the High Court. This decline is due to a change implemented(^\\text{11}) in November 2013, in which responsibility for the majority of Civil Immigration and Asylum judicial review cases were transferred from the Administrative Court (within the High Court) to the Upper Tribunal for Immigration and Asylum Chamber (UTIAC).

(^{11}) [www.justice.gov.uk/courts/rcj-rolls-building/administrative-court/applying-for-judicial-review](http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/rcj-rolls-building/administrative-court/applying-for-judicial-review) The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has both a Commonwealth and a domestic jurisdiction. In its Commonwealth jurisdiction, which is by far the largest part of its work, it hears appeals from those independent Commonwealth countries which have retained the appeal to Her Majesty in Council or, in the case of Republics, to the Judicial Committee itself. It also hears appeals from the United Kingdom overseas territories. There were 52 appeals made to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in 2015 and 53 cases were disposed of during the same period. Of the appeals entered Trinidad & Tobago entered the most, with 28 appeals.

The Supreme Court

The UK Supreme Court (UKSC) is the final court of appeal in the United Kingdom. In the UKSC in 2015, 242 petitions for permission to appeal were presented, and 233 were disposed of, of which 153 (66%) were refused outright and the remainder (76) were allowed to proceed or withdrawn (4). In the same year, 96 appeals were presented to the UKSC, 32 were dismissed, with 26 being allowed. Of the civil appeals presented from the Court of Appeal disposed of, 18 related to Judicial Reviews, 16 related to Practice and Procedure, and a further 8 to family.

The Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal is divided into two Divisions, Criminal and Civil. The Criminal Division hears appeals in criminal cases from the Crown Court. The Civil Division hears appeals mainly against decisions of

______________________________________________________________________

12 By agreement with the Sultan of Brunei, the Committee can hear appeals from the Brunei Court of Appeal, but in civil cases only, and gives its advice to the Sultan. the High Court and county courts, and also of tribunals and certain other courts, such as the Patents Court.

- **Criminal Division**

  During 2015, a total of 6,267 applications for leave to appeal were received, a 2% reduction on 2014, a continuing trend since 2008. Of these 1,517 (24%) were against conviction in the Crown Court and 4,444 (71%) against the sentence imposed. There were 5,630 applications considered by a single judge in 2015 and of these 1,288 (23%) were granted.

- **Civil Division**

  In 2015, there were 1,241 appeals were filed in the Court of Appeal on civil cases, a 2% decrease on the 1,269 in 2014. Of these, 258 (21%) related to the Immigration and Asylum tribunal, 240 (19%) related to the Queen’s Bench Administrative Court; and 134 (11%) to the County Court.

  In the same year, 5,029 civil appeal applications were filed or set down, the highest number recorded since 1994, up 3% on 2014. Of those cases filed or set down last year, 91% (4,574) were disposed of, an increase of 8% on 2014.

**The High Court**

In England and Wales, civil justice is administered mainly by the High Court and county courts (Chapter 1), the former handling the more substantial and complex cases. The High Court is divided into three main Divisions: the Chancery Division, the Queen’s Bench Division and the Family Division (Tables 3.12 to 3.24).

The core business of the Chancery Division is the resolution of disputes involving property in all its forms including commercial, business and intellectual property, competition disputes, taxation, and its traditional work relating to companies, partnerships, mortgages, insolvency, land and trusts.

The Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court deals mainly with civil actions in contract and tort (civil wrongs) and also hears more specialist matters, such as applications for judicial review. It contains within it the Commercial Court and the Admiralty Court, which deals with shipping matters such as damage to cargo. It also administers the Technology and Construction Court which hears cases involving prolonged examination of technical issues, such as construction disputes.

High court statistics relating to the family court are now published in the Family Court statistics bulletin. This can be found here: [www.gov.uk/government/collections/family-court-statistics-quarterly](http://www.gov.uk/government/collections/family-court-statistics-quarterly) Bankruptcy Court

Bankruptcy is where an individual is unable to pay his or her debts. Proceedings are started with a petition for bankruptcy. There were 5,432 bankruptcy petitions applications files in the High Court in London last year, a decrease of 2% since 2014 (Table 3.16).

Companies Court

The Companies Court in London primarily deals with the compulsory liquidation of companies and other cases under the Insolvency Act 1986 and the Companies Acts. Unlike an individual, a company cannot be made bankrupt, but may, because of insolvency or if there is some other reason it should cease to exist, be wound up instead (Table 3.17).

There were 13,666 applications made in the Companies Court last year, a 17% increase on 2014. Of the applications made last year a total of 4,554 were filed for winding-up petitions. There were also 2,112 winding-up orders made and a further 2,386 winding-up orders dismissed or withdrawn.

Queen’s Bench Division

In 2015 there were 12,297 proceedings started in the Queen’s Bench Division (Tables 3.19 to 3.24). This represents a decrease of 6% from 2014. Of these 4,869 (40%) were issued at the Royal Courts of Justice in London and the remainder at the various High Court District Registries around the country.

The 4,869 proceedings issued at the Royal Courts of Justice included 1,671 relating to personal injury, (up 15% on 2014 and representing 34% of claims) and 870 related to clinical negligence (up 34% on 2914 and representing 18% of claims). Of those 4,869 proceedings issued at the Royal Courts of Justice, 54% had a claim value of over £50,000. This varied by type of proceeding, from 21% for Tort (e.g. nuisance, trespass, assault, wrongful arrest, etc.) to 73% for clinical negligence and personal injury proceedings.

Actions are normally started by way of a claim or an originating summons. A claim is the most common method and is used, for example, when a claim is based on an allegation of fraud or a civil wrong; it informs defendants what is claimed against them. An originating summons is used in certain cases, such as applications under specific Acts; it outlines the nature of the case.

If a defendant fails to respond to a claim, a claimant may be entitled to a judgment by default; there were 944 such judgments by default last year.

If a defendant responds any of the following may result:

- the claimant may discontinue the action;
- the parties may reach agreement between themselves;
- the court may decide that the defendant has no real defence to the action and gives summary judgment; or, a trial takes place, in some circumstances with a jury.

Judgments of the Queen’s Bench Division may be enforced in many ways. By far the most common is the issuing of a writ of *fieri facias* (fi-fa). This directs the sheriff (the equivalent of the bailiff in the county courts) to seize, and if necessary, to sell the debtor’s goods to raise money to pay off the debt. There were 52,004 writs of fi-fa issued last year, an increase of 26% on 2014.

**Admiralty Court**

The Admiralty Court is part of the Queen’s Bench Division and deals with a range of naval cases such as ship collisions and damage to cargo (Tables 3.25 to 3.27). There is one Admiralty Judge who hears all admiralty cases and a number of interlocutory cases. The Admiralty Marshal is responsible for the detention and sale of ships which are the subject of proceedings in the Admiralty Court. Last year 158 claims were issued in the Admiralty Court at the Royal Courts of Justice in London, a decrease of 21% on 2014.

**Commercial Court**

The Commercial Court is part of the Queen’s Bench Division and is largely concerned with disputes around contracts, insurance, carriage of cargo and the construction of ships (table 3.28). Other cases dealt with at the Commercial Court include banking, international credit, contracts relating to aircraft, the purchase and sale of commodities and the practice of arbitration and questions arising from arbitrations. Some 870 claims were issued last year, a decrease of 20% on 2014. A spike in claims was seen during March 2015, these were submitted to avoid paying increased fees from April 2015 onwards. There has been a subsequent decrease in claims since the fee increase.

**Technology and construction court**

Cases dealt with at the Technology and Construction Court include building and engineering disputes, computer litigation, professional negligence, sale of goods, valuation disputes, and questions arising from arbitrations and adjudications in building and engineering disputes. The court also deals with any cases from the Chancery Division or elsewhere within the Queen’s Bench Division which involve issues or questions which are technically complex, or for which trial by judges at the court is for any reason desirable (table 3.29).

In 2015, a total of 437 claims were received in the Technology and Construction Court, an increase of 41 (9%) cases on 2014. In addition, 288 claims were disposed of, an increase of 19 claims on the previous year.

**Administrative Court**

The Administrative Court is part of the High Court and has a supervisory and appellate jurisdiction, overseeing the legality of decisions and actions of inferior courts, tribunals, local authorities, Ministers of the Crown and other public bodies and officials (Tables 3.30 and 3.31.) The role of the Administrative court includes the processing of Judicial Reviews, which is covered in more detail in Chapter 2. Therefore the following summary of the administrative court workload is excluding the JR cases

In 2015, there were a total of 69 appeals received through the magistrates and crown courts (54 and 15 respectively), a 53% increase on 2014. Of those received in 2015, 53 were disposed of, and in 40% of cases, the appeals were allowed.

In other areas of the administrative court (excluding judicial reviews) there were a total of 1,845 appeals and applications received, a small 3% decrease on 2014. Of these cases 760 were disposed of and 46% of these cases were allowed by the court. ‘Other statutory’ accounted for the highest number of appeals/application types, of which there were 1,615, down 2% from 2014. Statutory planning appeals/applications were level with 2014 at 203 applications, and 99 of these applications (49%) were disposed of at the time of publishing. Of those disposed, 68% were dismissed by the court and only 31% were allowed. 4: Offices of the Supreme Court

Offices of the official solicitor and public trustee

The Official Solicitor is a statutory office holder appointed by the Lord Chancellor under section 90 of the Senior Courts Act 1981.

The Public Trustee (appointed under section 8 of the Public Trustee Act 1906) acts as executor or administrator of estates and as the appointed trustee of settlements. The Public Trustee’s aim is to provide an effective executor and trustee service of last resort on a non-profit-making basis. (Table 4.1)

During 2015, there were 8,038 new referrals to the offices of the official solicitor and public trustee; 2,930 were cases of litigation, a slight increase on 2014. The remaining new referrals (5,108) were for administrative, trusts and estates cases, an 8% increase on 2014. 1,332 referrals were for child abduction cases, a 10% increase on 2014. Reciprocal enforcement maintenance orders (REMO) and child trust funds both saw increases on 2014, a 3% and 36% increase respectively.

Tipstaff

The duties of the Tipstaff are many and varied but, in broad practical terms, the Tipstaff is the enforcement officer for the High Court. The principal areas of specific duties emanate from the Queen’s Bench, Chancery and Family Divisions and involve issues of bankruptcy, insolvency, wardship, child abduction, contempt of court and many other miscellaneous orders which involve taking action to enforce, or prevent breach of, orders of the court.

The single biggest area of work for the Tipstaff relates to Family Division cases involving missing or abducted children. The Tipstaff is responsible for executing warrants on a range of possible Orders in these circumstances, including a Collection Order (for the return of a child), a Location Order (for the whereabouts of a child to be discovered), a Passport Order (for the seizure of passports or other travel documents) and Port Alerts (to prevent a child being wrongfully removed from the UK). (Table 4.2)

There were 540 new warrants of arrest issued in 2015, a slight decrease on 2014. Child abduction alerts accounted for 469 (87%) of these new warrants. 5: Magistrates (Justices of the Peace)

At the end of 2015/16 there were 19,338 Justices of the Peace (JPs), level with 2014/15 (Tables 5.4 to 5.5). Over the years there has been a decline in overall numbers, this has been as result of reduced recruitment (due to a reduction in the adult criminal court workload) combined with relatively consistent annual levels of resignations and retirements.

The proportion of men and women JPs was equal up to 2008 but since 2009 there have been slightly more women JPs than men. At the end of 2015/16 53% of JPs were women.

Figure 5.2: Justices of the Peace workforce, by gender, 2004 to 2015

There were 668 new Justices of the Peace appointed in 2015/16, up 46% from 2014/15, the first increase in some years. In 2015/6, 53% of JPs appointed were women, down from 60% in 2014/15. Figure 8.3: Justices of the Peace appointed, by gender, 2004/05 to 2015/16

For information on judicial appointments please see www.jac.judiciary.gov.uk/jac-official-statistics and for statistics on diversity of the current judiciary see www.judiciary.gov.uk/subject/judicial-diversity/ 6: Assessment of litigation costs, and publicly funded legal services

Senior court costs office

The senior court costs office deals with the detailed assessment of costs. This is the process of examining and if, necessary, reducing the bill of costs of a solicitor or litigant in person. The purpose of detailed assessment is to either determine how much costs a successful party in litigation is entitled to recover from his unsuccessful opponent, or in publicly funded cases to determine the amount which a solicitor or barrister is to be paid out of public funds, and finally under the Solicitors’ Act to determine how much a client should have to pay his solicitor. (Table 6.1)

In 2015, 15,943 assessments were received in the senior court costs office, an increase of 5% compared to 2014. Of these assessments, 46% were receivers’ costs in the court of protection and 33% were civil legal aid assessments. Annex A: Planned upcoming changes to publication

There are currently no planned changes to the publication. Annex B: List of Accompanying Tables and CSV

Accompanying this publication are the following tables:

**Chapter 1 - Civil Courts:**

1.1 County court activity, England and Wales, annually 2000 - 2016, quarterly Q1 2009 – Q1 2016

1.2 Number of claims issued in the county and magistrates’ courts, by type of claim, England and Wales, annually 2000 - 2016, quarterly Q1 2009 – Q1 2016

1.3 Claims defended and allocations to track, England and Wales, annually 2000 – 2016, quarterly Q1 2009 – Q1 2016

1.4 Case progression in the county courts, England and Wales, annually 2009 - 2016, quarterly Q1 2009 – Q1 2016

1.5 Number of trials and small claim hearings and the average time to reach trial/hearing, England and Wales, annually 2000 - 2016, quarterly Q1 2009 – Q1 2016

1.6 Number of defended claims by case type and details of legal representation, England and Wales, annually 2013 - 2016, quarterly Q1 2009 – Q1 2016

**Chapter 2 - Judicial Reviews in the Administrative Court:**

2.1 Number of case applications for permission to apply for Judicial Review by topic, at the Administrative Court, 2000 – Q1 2016

2.2 Case Progression: number of Judicial Review cases that reach permission stage, oral renewal stage and final hearing by cases lodged, at the Administrative Court, 2000 – Q1 2016

2.3 Timeliness (in days) of Judicial Review cases started at the Administrative Court, by staged reached, 2000 – Q1 2016

2.4 Number of Judicial Reviews at the Administrative Court classed as ‘Totally Without Merit’ between 1 October 2012 to 31 March 2016

2.5 Number of Judicial Review applications lodged, granted permission to proceed to final hearing and found in favour of the claimant at final hearing, by defendant Department or Public Body, 2007 to 2015 Chapter 3 – The Royal Courts of Justice:

3.1 Summary statistics on overall caseload, 1938 – 2015

Judicial Committee of the Privy Council 3.2 Appeals entered and disposed of, 2003 – 2015 3.3 Petitions for special leave to appeal heard, granted and refused, 2003 – 2015

Supreme Court 3.4 Applications for permission to appeal presented and disposed of, 2009 – 2015 3.5 Appeals presented and disposed of, 2009 – 2015

House of Lords and Supreme Court 3.6 Civil appeals presented from the Court of Appeal, disposed of by judgment, by subject matter, 2003 – 2015

Court of Appeal 3.7 Applications for leave to appeal, by type and result, 1995 – 2015 3.8 Results of appeals heard by full court, 1995 – 2015 3.9 Final appeals filed and disposed of, showing court appealed from and results, 2003 -2015 3.10 Interlocutory appeals filed and disposed of, showing court appealed from and results, 2003 – 2015 3.11 Applications set down and disposed of, 1994 – 2015

The High Court – Chancery Division 3.12 Summary of proceedings started, 2003 – 2015 3.13 Orders made by masters, enforcement issues and appointments before masters, London, 2003 – 2015 3.14 Claims and originating proceedings issued in London by nature of proceedings, 2002 – 2015 3.15 Cases listed in London disposed of, by listing type, 2003 – 2015 3.16 Originating proceedings in Bankruptcy court, 2003 – 2015 3.17 Summary of Companies Court proceedings, London, 2003 – 2015 3.18 Appeals and special cases from inferior courts and tribunals set down and determined, showing subject matter and results, 2003 – 2015

High Court – Queens Bench Division 3.19 Summary statistics on proceedings started, 2003 – 2015 3.20 Proceedings started, by nature and value of claim, 2003 – 2015 3.21 Judgment without trial, by type and value of judgment, 2003 -2015 3.22 Originating receipts and trials concluded in the year, 2005 – 2015 3.23 Interlocutory applications for masters in London, 2006 -2015 3.24 Enforcement proceedings issued, 2011 – 2015

Admiralty Court 3.25 Summary statistics on admiralty proceedings, 2003 – 2015 3.26 Admiralty claims issued by nature of action, 2003 – 2015 3.27 Admiralty actions for trial in the High Court set down, tried or otherwise disposed of, 2003 -2015

Commercial Court 3.28 Claims issued showing nature and value of claim, 2009 -2015

Technology and construction court 3.29 Summary caseload statistics, 2003 – 2015

High Court – Administrative Court 3.30 Summary statistics on appeals by way of case stated, 2015 3.31 Summary statistics on applications and appeals other than for Judicial Review or by way of case stated, 2015

Chapter 4 - Offices of the Supreme Court 4.1 Summary casework statistics, 2006 – 2015 4.2 Casework statistics, 2010 – 2015

Chapter 5 - The Judiciary and Magistracy 5.1 Days sat by judge type, 2003 – 2015 5.2 Days sat by judge type showing type of work dealt with, 2003 – 2015 5.3 Days sat by HMCTS region, 2003 – 2015 5.4 Justices of the Peace, by sex, 1978 – 2015 5.5 Justices of the Peace appointed, by sex, 1990 – 2015/16

Chapter 6- Assessment of litigation costs, and publicly funded legal services

Senior Court Cost Office 6.1 Number of costs bills assessed, by type of case giving rise to the bill, 2003 – 2015

Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and Supreme Court of the United Kingdom 6.2 Number of costs bills assessed and their total and average allowed values, 2003 - 2015 Annex C: Timeline of changes to civil procedures

- Brooke reforms – April 2013, changed the value limits for money claims allocated to each track.

- Jackson reforms – April 2013, changed the process for managing multi track claims.

- Implementation of the tribunals, courts and enforcement act – April 2014, various changes to the procedures for enforcement of judgments.

- Single county court – April 2014, changed the way in which claims are issue

- Introduction of secure data transfer (SDT) – November 2014, allowed customers issuing bulk claims to do so more easily

- Fee enhancements, March 2015 – increased the fee required to issue money claims. Annex C: Explanatory notes

The United Kingdom Statistics Authority has designated these statistics as National Statistics, in accordance with the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007 and signifying compliance with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics. Designation can be broadly interpreted to mean that the statistics:

- meet identified user needs;
- are well explained and readily accessible;
- are produced according to sound methods, and
- are managed impartially and objectively in the public interest.

Once statistics have been designated as National Statistics, it is a statutory requirement that the Code of Practice shall continue to be observed.

Breakdowns of many of the summary figures presented in this bulletin, such as split by case type or by HMCTS area, are available in the comma separated value (csv) files that accompany this publication.

In the civil section of the publication the terminology ‘hearings or trials’ had previously been used to describe civil claims reaching this stage. We now use the term ‘trials’, as this is a more accurate reflection of what the figures represent. This does not change the historical or current figures reported.

Data Quality and Revisions

An initial revision to the statistics for the latest quarter may be made when the next edition of this bulletin is published. Further revisions may be made when the figures are reconciled at the end of the year. If revisions are needed in the subsequent year, these will be clearly annotated in the tables.

Additional revisions have been made in this publication to the quarterly claims and defences figures for 2014. The claims figures have been revised to omit a small number of family cases, recently collected via the Civil Court Case Management system. These figures will be incorporated into the Family Justice Statistics Quarterly publication.

The Judicial Review figures are taken from the Administrative Court Office COINS database. As the Judicial Review figures are extracted from this live database, all figures are refreshed each quarter and there will be minor revisions between the new information presented in the latest bulletin and earlier data published. When analysing JRs by department the ‘defendant type’ variable is derived from the free text field ‘defendant name’ and is therefore open to inputting/human error and subject to correction by a Judge when determining the claim. The defendant name is grouped into department/public body where it is possible to identify and this is down to the interpretation of the analysts. Although we have checked and cleansed the data for publication, the quality of the information in this section is limited and should be used with caution. Symbols and conventions

The following symbols have been used throughout the tables in this bulletin:

.. = Not applicable

- = Between zero and two. Low numbers are suppressed to stop individuals being identified (r) = Revised data (p) = Provisional data

Further information

Earlier editions of this publication can be found at: www.gov.uk/government/collections/civil-justice-statistics-quarterly

Statistics on Tribunals (including Judicial Reviews dealt with by the UTIAC) can be found at: www.gov.uk/government/collections/tribunals-statistics

Statistics on the use of interpreters and translation services in courts and tribunals can be found at: www.gov.uk/government/collections/statistics-on-the-use-of-language-services-in-courts-and-tribunals

Information on Civil County Court Mortgage and Landlord Possession Statistics can be found at: www.gov.uk/government/collections/mortgage-and-landlord-possession-statistics

Information on publicly funded legal services is now published by the Legal Aid Agency and can be found here: www.gov.uk/government/collections/legal-aid-statistics

Information on civil justice in Scotland can be found here www.gov.scot/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Crime-Justice/civil-judicial-statistics/

Information on civil justice in Northern Ireland can be found here

A detailed analysis of county court judgments by region produced by Registry Trust Ltd can be found at the link below. This data gives aggregated detail on judgments that have been made by the county courts and recorded on the judgments register. www.data.gov.uk/publisher/registry-trust-limited

The total number of CCJs differs from that published in Civil Court Statistics Quarterly, because Registry Trust manually checks the details of each judgment. More detail on Registry Trust can be found at: www.registry-trust.org.uk/ Contacts

Press enquiries on the contents of this bulletin should be directed to the MoJ or HMCTS press offices:

**Sebastian Walters**\
Tel: 020 3334 3529\
Email: Sebastian.walters@justice.gsi.gov.uk

**Zoe Campbell**\
Tel: 020 3334 6698\
Email: zoe.campbell@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Other enquiries about these statistics should be directed to the Justice Statistics Analytical Services division of the MoJ:

**Alison Colquhoun**\
Ministry of Justice\
102 Petty France\
London\
SW1H 9AJ\
Email: statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk

General enquiries about the statistics work of the MoJ can be emailed to statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk

General information about the official statistics system of the UK is available from statisticsauthority.gov.uk/about-the-authority/uk-statistical-system

© Crown copyright\
Produced by the Ministry of Justice\
Alternative formats are available on request from statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk